| Forbes, G. (1993) Time, events, and modality. In R. Le Poidevin and M. MacBeath (eds.), The Philosophy of Time, 80–95. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fraenkel, A.A. (1961) Abstract Set Theory Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics. 2nd rev. edn. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: North-Holland. Frampton, P. (2007a) Cyclic universe and infinite past, preprint http://arxiv.org/abs/0705.2730 (accessed July 11,2008). Frampton, Р. (2007b) Comment on «Can black holes be torn up by a phantom in cyclic cosmology?» by X. Zhang, preprint http://arxiv.org/abs/0709.1630 (accessed July 11, 2008). Frampton, P.H. and Takahashi, T. (2003) The fate of dark energy. Physical Letters В 557,135, preprint: http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0211544. Frampton, P.H. and Takahashi, T. (2004) Bigger rip with no dark energy. Astropart. Phys. 22, 307, preprint: http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0405333. Gale, R. (2007) The failure of classic theistic arguments. In M. Martin (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Atheism, Cambridge Companions to Philosophy, 86–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gamow, G. (1946) One, Two, Three, Infinity. London: Macmillan. Gott, J.R. Ill, Gunn, J.E., Schramm, D.N., and Tinsley, В.М. (1976) Will the universe expand forever? Scientific American, March, 6 Gott, J.R. Ill and Li, L.-X. (1998) Can the universe create itself? Physical Review D 58:2, 023501–1. Greene, B. (2004) The Fabric of the Cosmos. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Grieg, J. (ed.) (1932) The Letters of David Hume, 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Grünbaum, A. (1950–1) Relativity and the atomicity of becoming. Review of Metaphysics 4,143–186. Grünbaum, A. (1967) The anisotropy of time. In T. Gold (ed.), The Nature of Time, 49–186. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Grünbaum, A. (1973) Philosophical Problems of Space and Time, 2nd ed. Boston Studies for the Philosophy of Science 12. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: D. Reidel. Grünbaum, A. (1990a) Pseudo-creation of the Big Bang. Nature 344, 821–822. Grünbaum, A. (1990b) The pseudo-problem of creation in physical cosmology. In J. Leslie (ed.), Physical Cosmology and Philosophy, Philosophical Topics, 92–112. New York: Macmillan. |
| ill. 33: disputatio longissima) describen aún otra circular pascual escrita para refutar a los antropomorfitas, es decir, a los que atribuían a Dios un cuerpo humano. 4. Facundo de Hermiana (Pro defens, trium capit. 6,5) atestigua que Teófilo compuso un folleto violento contra San Juan Crisóstomo por haber dado asilo a algunos monjes origenistas que el alejandrino había expulsado de Egipto. Facundo hace una detallada descripción de esta obra y copia unos párrafos; la llama «enormem librum, non solum contumeliis, sed ipsa quoque saepe repetita maledictorum recapitulatione nimis horribilem.» Jerónimo no titubeó en traducirlo al latín, y por la Ep. 114 nos enteramos de que un fragmento de su traducción se conserva en su Ep. 113, que da a entender que Teófilo denunció a San Juan Crisóstomo por haber profanado la liturgia y el altar. Esta fue una de las acusaciones lanzadas por el sínodo de la Encina; lo sabemos por Facundo, quien la cita al pie de la letra (1.c., 6,5; FOCIO, Bibl. cod. 59). Es posible que fuera Teófilo quien fraguara la calumnia, enojado por la vuelta de San Juan Crisóstomo en octubre del año 403. 5. Contra Orígenes Genadio (De vir. ill. 33) no menciona la diatriba contra el Crisóstomo; pero, en cambio, conoce «un grueso volumen contra Orígenes.» Probablemente no era más que una colección de las cartas sinodales y pascuales contra Orígenes. Por ejemplo, Teodoreto (Dial 2) copia del Contra Orígenes de Teófilo dos pasajes que aparecen en la carta pascual del año 401 (JERÓNIMO, Ep. 96,4) y en la del 402 (ibid., 98,16), respectivamente. 6. Homilías En los Apophthegmata Patrum se conserva, en su texto original griego, una Homilía sobre el juicio (PG 65,200,4). M. Briére (ROC 18 1913 79s) publicó una versión siríaca. Se conserva una Homilía sobre la contrición y la abstinencia en una traducción copta editada por E. A. W. Budge, Coptic Homilies in the Dialect of Upper Egypt ed. from the Papyrus Codex or.5001 in the British Museum (Londres 1910) 66s.212s. También se conserva en copto otra Homilía sobre la Cruz y el Ladrón, que publicó F. de Rossi, Papiri coptici di Τorino I 1,64. M. Richard descubrió una Homilía sobre la institución de la Eucaristía, demostrando que el sermón In mysticam cenam, atribuido a San Cirilo de Alejandría (PG 77,1016–1029), es, en realidad, un discurso de Teófilo dirigido contra los monjes origenistas, cuya fecha se puede señalar en marzo del año 400 (M. RICHARD, Une homélie de Théophile d " Alexandrie sur l’institution de l’Eucharistie: RHE 33 1937 46–56). |
| О восточном происхождении и характере термина ομοοσιος ср., между прочим, Schwartz Ε. Kaiser Constantin und die christliche Kirche. Leipzig, 1913. S. 118–120 (с ссылкой на Holl К. S. VI-VII). Ориген был против применения этого термина к Лицам Св. Троицы. Ср.: Болотов В. В. Учение Оригена о Св. Троице. СПб., 1879. С. 268–277. У Филосторгия, между прочим, сообщается, что Александр Александрийский, еще до Никейского собора, поспешил прибыть в Никомидию морем раньше Ария и его сторонников, путешествовавших по суше через Палестину, Финикию, Сирию и Киликию, и убедил здесь Осия и бывших с Осием епископов утвердить на соборе единосущие. См.: Philost. Η. е. I, 7. Bidez. P. 8–9 (у Фотия: συνοδικς ψηφοις νομολογησαι — μοοσιον τφ πατρ τν υον, и в более подробном рассказе в Vita Constantini, Cod. Angelic, gr. 22: κυρωσαι τ μοοσιον). Об σσα и πστασις ср.: Socr. Ill, 7, 12. 236 В переводе Швартца, S. 278 3 : ξ ν ρωτθησαν και ρτησαν, λγχθησαν μοδοξοντες τοις μετ " " Αρεου και ναντα τοις προκειμνοις φρονοντες. 237 Как говорят они сами в послании, п. 23. По Сократу, II, 20, они устроили собор в Филиппополе и оттуда писали послания (будто бы с анафемат–ствованием μοοσιον и утверждением νμοιον, что невероятно). 238 Hilarii Pictav. Fragm. hist. Ill, η. 27 Zeit Constantin " s des Grossen. Leipzig, 180.6) Franciss F. Der deutsche Episcopat! in seinem Verhaltniss zu Kaiser und Reich unter Heinrich III. 1039–1056. Zwei Theile. Regensburg, 1879. 7) Bachmann R. Niclas Storch, der Anfanger der Zweickauer Wiedertaufer. Zwickau, 1880. Системы: 8) Hergenrother J. Hand-buch der allgemeinen Kirchengeschichte. Bd. I—III. Freiburg i. Br., 1879-1880. 9) Schmid H. Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte. Th. I. Erlangen, 1880. 10) Lan-dererM. A. Neueste Dogmengeschichte (von Semler bis auf die Gegenwart). Heil-bronn, 1881. 11) Biihler Ch. Der Altkatholicismus, historisch und kritisch dar-gestellt. Leiden, 1880. 12) Michelis F. Katholische Dogmatik. Zwei Theile. Freiburg i. Br. 1881. 13) Laurin F. Der Colibat der Geistlichen nach canonischem Rechte. Wien, 1880. 14) Sohm R. Zur Trauungsfrage. Heilbronn, 1879. 15) Die-ckhoff W. Civilehe und kirchliche Trauung. Rostock, 1880. 502 |
| 297. Apparent Compounds . – Sometimes words often used together come to be written as one word (cf. § 1, note): thus, Δισ-κοροι sons of Zeus (i.e. the Dioscuri, Castor and Pollux), πο-πμπω send away. Such words, although they are usually classed among compound words, are not real compounds, but only apparent. 298 89 . Compound Verbs . – Verbs can be compounded (see § 207) only with prepositions (which were originally adverbs modifying the verb): thus, πι-βλλω throw on. Note. – It must be noticed that in denominative verbs formed from compound nouns the verb is not compounded. Thus, πεθοµαι means obey, but disobey is not but πειθ (-ω), a denominative verb formed from -πειθς disobedient. 299 90 . Inseparable Prefixes . – Certain words used to form the first part of compound words have no separate existence. The most important are: 1 . ν- (before a consonant -, usually called alpha privative) not, like Latin in-, English un-: thus, ν-αιδς shameless, -θεος godless. 2 . – conjunctive: thus, -λοχος bed-fellow. 3 . δυσ– (the opposite of ε well), ill, dificult: thus, δσ-ποτµος ill-starred, δυσ-χερς hard to handle. 4 . μι– half-: thus, μ-θεος demigod. MEANING OF COMPOUND WORD 300 . The meaning of most compound words is at once evident from the meaning of their parts. In nearly all of them the first part limits or determines the meaning of the second part: thus, ψευδ-μαντις false prophet, μ-δουλος fellow-slave, -γραφος unwritten, μφι-θατρον round theater, χειρο-ποητος hand-made, ργυρ-τοξος silver-bowed=having a silver bow, γλαυκ-πις bright-eyed. 1 . Observe that compound nouns may be either substantives or adjectives, and that often a verbal clement in a compound word may have either an active or a passive meaning: thus, compare λογο-γρφος speech-writer with -γραφος unwritten. Note. – In compound words whose last part is a verbal formed by the suffix –ο– the written accent regularly stands on that part of the word which indicates the agent (or instrument): thus, μητρο-κτνος mother-slayer, matricide, µητρ-κτονος mother-slain, i.e. slain by a mother; λιβο-βλος stone-throwing, λιθ-βολος struck by stones. When the written accent is on the last part of the word, it stands on the penult if that is short, otherwise on the ultima: thus, λογο-γρφος speech-writer, but λογο-ποις speech-maker, στρατ-ηγς army-leader, general. |
| 1665 Об Игнатии Антиохийском нам известно немногое. Достоверно лишь то, что он был епископом антиохийской церкви и мучеником за веру. По древнему преданию он был вторым епископом Антиохии (Евсев. III, 22; Ориген , Hom. 6 in Luc. и Иероним De vir. ill. c. 16). Предание Апостольских Постановлений (VII, 46), что Еводий Петром, а Игнатий Павлом были поставлены в епископы Антиохии, не имеет никакого достоинства. Время епископата Игнатия Евсевий в своей хронике ставит между годами 2085 и 2123, или между первым годом Веспасиана и 10 годом Траяна. Но точный год смерти Игнатия был, по-видимому, неизвестен Евсевию. Иероним год смерти Игнатия относит к 11 году Траяна (De vir. ill. c. 16), Martyrium Colbertinum (c. 2) к 9 году Траяна, вероятно основываясь на Хронике Евсевия. Известие писавшего во VII веке хрониста Иоанна Малалы из Антиохии, что Игнатии был казнен в Антиохии во время землетрясения, случившегося 13 декабря 115 года (Migne, Р. G. XCVII 417), противоречит содержанию посланий. Древнейший из мученических актов (Martyrium Colbertinum) днем смерти Игнатия считает 20 декабря 107 года. Но свидетельство этих актов, плохо согласуемое с другими историческими известиями и с самими посланиями Игнатия, считается учеными очень сомнительным (ср. Bardenhewer, Geschichte der altkirchlichen Litteratur I B. 1902. S. 143. Battifol, Anciennes littératures chrétiennes. 1897, p. 16). Вслед за Гарнаком большинство ученых относит происхождение посланий к 110–117 г. 1666 Послания Игнатия Антиохийского дошли до нас в трех различных рецензиях: в двух греческих, из которых одна краткая, а другая – пространная, и в одной сирийской. Краткая греческая рецензия, открытая и изданная впервые в 1646 г по кодексу библиотеки Медичи во Флоренции Исааком Фоссом, заключает в себе 7 выше означенных общеизвестных посланий Игнатия, перечисленных уже у Евсевия (III, 36). Пространная греческая рецензия, открытая и изданная в 1557 году Валентином Фридом, содержит 13 посланий, в числе которых находятся семь выше означенных посланий однако в пространной редакции со многими вставками и кроме того послания: Марии Кассобольской к Игнатию, Игнатия к Марии Кассобольской, Игнатия же к Тарсянам, Антиохийцам, Герону (диакону антиохийскому) и Филиппийцам. |
| And the city or society of the wicked, who live not according to God, but according to man, and who accept the doctrines of men or devils in the worship of a false and contempt of the true divinity, is shaken with those wicked emotions as by diseases and disturbances. And if there be some of its citizens who seem to restrain and, as it were, temper those passions, they are so elated with ungodly pride, that their disease is as much greater as their pain is less. And if some, with a vanity monstrous in proportion to its rarity, have become enamored of themselves because they can be stimulated and excited by no emotion, moved or bent by no affection, such persons rather lose all humanity than obtain truetranquillity. For a thing is not necessarily right because it is inflexible, nor healthy because it is insensible. Chapter 10.– Whether It is to Be Believed that Our First Parents in Paradise, Before They Sinned, Were Free from All Perturbation. But it is a fair question, whether our first parent or first parents (for there was a marriage of two), before they sinned, experienced in their animal body such emotions as we shall not experience in the spiritual body when sin has been purged and finally abolished. For if they did, then how were they blessed in that boasted place of bliss, Paradise? For who that is affected by fear or grief can be called absolutely blessed? And what could those persons fear or suffer in such affluence of blessings, where neither death nor ill-health was feared, and where nothing was wanting which a good will could desire, and nothing present which could interrupt man " s mental or bodily enjoyment? Their love to God was unclouded, and their mutual affection was that of faithful and sincere marriage; and from this love flowed a wonderful delight, because they always enjoyed what was loved. Their avoidance of sin was tranquil; and, so long as it was maintained, no other ill at all could invade them and bring sorrow. Or did they perhaps desire to touch and eat the forbidden fruit, yet feared to die; and thus both fear and desire already, even in that blissful place, preyed upon those first of mankind? Away with the thought that such could be the case where there was no sin! And, indeed, this is already sin, to desire those things which the law of God forbids, and to abstain from them through fear of punishment, not through love of righteousness. |
| PHRANTZES. Vide GEORGIUS P. PIERIUS Alexandrinus, s. Ill, 10. Fg. 243–46, ex Hieronymo. Notitia S. Hieronymi, 241–4; Photii, c. 119, 243–6. PISIDA. Vide GEORGIUS P. PIUS I, papa, s. II, 5. Epistolas 1–4 et Decreta (Mansi), 1119–30. Notitia ex Libro pontificati, 1093–94. Dissertatio Fontanini (ex G), 1093–1118. PIUS II, papa. 1458–64, 161. Bulla, LXXI1I-V1 (Appendix monumentorum de Bessarione V). Bulla altera ad Bessarionem, LXXVI-VII (ibid. VI). Epistola ad Mahumetum (Reusner), 162, 1349, PGLT., 80, 961–1016. PLANUDES. Vide MAXIMUS P. PLATINA, 1481, 161. Panegyricus Bessarionis, isto vivente dictus, latine, CIII-XVI. PLETHO. Vide GEORGIUS GEMISTUS P. POLYGARPUS Smyrniorum ep., s. II, 5. Epistola ad Philippenses, 1005–16; veislo antiqua, 1015–22. Fg. e responsionum capitulis, 1025–8. Monitum G., l201–4. Epistola ecclesiæ Smyrnensis, 1029–46. Hefele prolegomena, 995–1004. [POLYCHRONIUS Apameæ ep., s. V, 162. Commentariorum in Ezechielem, fg. (M.), 611. Danielem, Ig. (M.), 663. Notitia M., 607.] POLYCRATES EPHESIORUM ep., s. II, 5. Fg. 1–2 ex epistola ad Victorem, papam, 1357–62. Acta S. Timothei ep. Ephesini martyris, 1363–66. AA.SS. Monitum, 1361–4. Notitia G., 1355–8. PONTIANUS papa, s. Ill, 10. Epistolæ 1–2 (Mansi), 159–66. Notitia e Libro pontificati, 155–6, Coustant, 157–8. PS.-PRESBYTERI ET DIACONI Achaiæ, s. I.sc. IV. 2. Epistola de martyrio S. Andreæ, 1217–48. Tischendorf. Variæ lectiones in imis paginis. Tischendorf. De nova recensione textus 1215–18. Testimonia veterum, 1187–98. Dissertatio G., 1199–1216. PRISCUS, rhetor, s. V, 113. Excerpta de legationibus gentium ad Romanos (jussu Constantini Porphyrogeniti), 677–702. Excerpta de legationibus Romanorum ad gentes (id.), 703–756. Notitia Niebuhr, 621–3. PROCLUS CP. episc, s. V, 65. (Ex editione G., cum supplemento M.) Orationes, 1–20. 1 . De laudibus S. Mariæ, 679–92. 2–3. De incarnatione Domini, 691–704 et 703–08. 4 . In natalem diem Domini, 707–16. 5–6. De laudibus S. Mariæ, 715–22; 721–58. 7 . In S. Theophania, 757–64. |
| All the data available to date suggests that vaccines – at least those for which relevant studies have been conducted – provide sufficient protection even for strains that partially escape from immunity. That is, those who have recovered become infected with them, and post-vaccination immunity, according to laboratory studies, is enough to still prevent a person from getting sick. According to the results of laboratory studies, the effectiveness is lower, but it is still such that it will prevent a person from getting sick, or at least prevent a severe course of the disease. Vaccines, in contrast to the disease, give a more stable immunity with a high titer of antibodies. And they may be enough to protect against those strains that escape from the immune system. Myth 10. People are injected with microchips through vaccination. This is such a delusional assumption that I don’t even know how to choose the words to debunk it. Such ideas are something from the category of ideas about the existence of magic and witchcraft or the world government of the reptilians. When scientists face this idea, they find themselves in a difficult situation, because such nonsense is very difficult to debunk. Moreover, any attempt at refutation plays into the hands of those who spread this nonsense, because it immediately allows them to say: “Ahhh, they make excuses, so there is definitely something behind this!” At the same time, it is useless to explain something to people who believe in this, so there is no point in doing it. It is utopian to think that it is possible to convince all the inhabitants of the planet, and talking about microchips is an excellent marker indicating that in this case it is not worth wasting the time and effort. Myth 11. If a person, who was previously ill with coronavirus, gets vaccinated against it, he or she will get sick in a severe form. I don’t think so. This phenomenon, which is common in some viruses, is called antibody-dependent infection enhancement (ADE). It is described, for example, for Dengue fever, when people were ill with one serotype (variety) of this virus, and then the disease progressed more severely when infected with another serotype. Also, the vaccination against Dengue fever in some cases caused a more severe course of the infection, probably also due to the inaccurate penetration of the immune response developed as a result of the vaccination into the serotypes common in the population. |
| In his address to the Pope at the opening of the Council, St. Mark explained how ardently he desired this union with the Latins- but a genuine union, he explained, based upon unity of faith and ancient Liturgical practice. He also informed the Pope that he and the other Orthodox bishops had come to the Council not to sign a capitulation, and not to sell Orthodoxy for the benefit of their government, but in order to confirm true and pure doctrine. Many of the Greek delegates, however, thought that the salvation of Byzantium could be attained only through union with Rome. More and more became willing to compromise the eternal Truth for the sake of preserving a temporal kingdom. Furthermore, the negotiations were of such unexpectedly long duration that the Greek delegates no longer had means to support themselves; they began to suffer from hunger and were anxious to return home. The Pope, however, refused to give them any support until a “Union” had been concluded. Taking advantage of the Situation and realizing the futility of further debates, the Latins used their economic and political advantage to bring pressure on the Orthodox delegation, demanding that they capitulate to the Roman Church and accept all her doctrines and administrative control. St. Mark stood alone against the rising tide which threatened to overturn the ark of the true Church. He was pressured on all sides, not only by the Latins, but by his fellow Greeks and the Patriarch of Constantinople himself. Seeing his persistent and stouthearted refusal to sign any kind of accord with Rome under the given conditions, the Emperor dismissed him from all further debates with the Latins and placed him under house arrest. By this time St. Mark had fallen very ill (apparently suffering from cancer of the intestine). But this exhausted, fatally ill man, who found himself persecuted and in disgrace, represented in his person the Orthodox Church; he was a spiritual giant with whom there is none to compare. Events followed in rapid succession. The aged Patriarch Joseph of Constantinople died; a forged document of submission to Rome was produced; Emperor John Paleologos took the direction of the Church into his own hands, and the Orthodox were obliged. to renounce their Orthodoxy and to accept all of the Latin errors, novelties, and innovations on all counts, including complete acceptance of the Pope as having “a primacy over the whole earth.” During a triumphant service following the signing of the Union on July 5, 1439, the Greek delegates solemnly kissed the Pope’s knee. Orthodoxy had been sold, and not merely betrayed, for in return for submission, the Pope agreed to provide money and soldiers for the defense of Constantinople against the Turks. But one bishop still had not signed. When Pope Eugenius saw that St. Mark’s signature was not on the Act of Union, he exclaimed, “And so, we have accomplished nothing!” |
| 1385 У Дрэзеке в издании сочинений Аполлинария к этим же силлогизмам причисляется и «слово в похвалу еванг. Иоанна» (рр. 352, 353), но как надписание, так и начало этого слова не позволяют нам согласиться на отожествление его с силлогизмами. 1395 Antirr., с. VII, – Migne, gr. s., t. 45, c. 1137; Твор. св. Григор. Нисского, т. VII, стр. 71, 72. 1403 Иероним выражается: «feruntur contra hunc (Marcellum) Asterii et Apollinarii libri», – De vir. ill., c. LXXXVI. 1406 Klose, Geschichte und Lehre Eunom., s. 34; Fritsche, De Theodor. Mopsuest. vita et scriptis, p. 97; Dräseke in Brieger’s Zeitschr. f. Kirchengesch., 1889, I, 35. 1407 См. его статью «Des Apollinarios v. Laodicea Schrift wider Eunomios» в «Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, XI Band. 1889–1890, 1 Heft., ss. 22–62; в сокращенном виде эта статья приложена им к изданию догматических сочинений Аполлинария, см. стр. 122–138. 1408 Достаточно в данном случае указать на Иеронима (De vir. ill. с. Филосторгия (Н. Е VIII, 12 – Migne, gr. s., 65, 565), Григория Нисского (Contra Eunom., – Migne, gr. s , t. 45) и Фотия (Cod. 4, 5, 6 и др.). 1409 opera omnia, stud. Juliani Garnieri, Paris, 1721, t. I, p. XII sq. – Это издание перепечатано Минем в Patrol. curs. compl. – В дальнейшем мы будем цитировать его уже по Миню. 1412 Уже Эразм считал невозможным приписать две последние книги Василию; основательное изследование этого вопроса принадлежит Гарнье; впрочем, и оно было дополняемо по более частым пунктам. 1413 Во втором томе «Библиотеки» Тило, Bibl. patr. graec. dogm., Leipzig, 1854. – В своем издании сочинений Аполлинария Дрезеке поместил и две последние книги против Евномия в качестве несомненно-Аполлинариева произведения, перепечатав их с издания Гарнье (рр. 205–251; cf. adn. p. 401): но в видах практического удобства мы все пять книг против Евномия будем цитировать в дальнейшем по Миню. 1418 В русском переводе дан заголовок, начинающийся со слов: «ποραι» – «трудные положения и решения и т.д.», – Твор. св. Вас. т. VII, стр. |
|
|
